Florida prosecutor Angela Corey has come under withering criticism from Alan Dershowitz for overcharging and leaving out important details in the Affidavit of Probable Cause filed in connection with the charge of Second Degree Murder lodged against George Zimmerman.

Corey allegedly responded by threatening to sue Dershowitz and Harvard. This appears to be part of a pattern when she is criticized.

Now Corey has brought a charge of felony perjury against Zimmermans wife, Shellie, based on testimony during Georges bond hearing with regard to their financial resources. (Criminal Information and Affidavit of Probable Cause embedded at bottom of post.)

There certainly is a case which can be made that the Court was not fully informed of the financial situation, and that is part of the reason the Judge revoked bond under the standards applicable to release pending trial.

But that bond standard is very different from a criminal charge of perjury, which requires proof of a specific material false statement which the person believes not to be true at the time of testimony.

The Criminal Information (embedded at the bottom of this post) does not say. Instead, the accompanying Affidvit recites testimony, phone call transcripts, and evidence of money received and transferred. Again, that all is relevant to whether George deceived the Court at the bond hearing.

But nowhere in the criminal Information or Affidavit of Probable Cause is a specific sentence or set of words identified as false with an explanation of why it was false.

I think there is a reason for this. Many of the answers of Shellie were non-committal. Since the prosecution does not specify which statements were false, here are some possibilities taken from the testimony quoted in the Affidavit of Probable Cause:

Q. Other major assets that you have which you can liquidate reasonably to assist in coming up with money for a bond? A. None that I know of.

What are major assets? Isnt that a matter of opinion? Similarly, what does reasonably mean? Isnt that also a matter of judgment, not a fact? The same lack of clarity accrues to liquidate. If the alleged funds already were liquid, the funds could not be liquidated again.

Q. I have discussed with you the pending motion to have your husband George declared indigent for cost, have I not? A. Yes, you have. Q. And is  - are you of any financial means where you can assist in those costs? A. Uhrn, not-  not that Im aware of.

This question by defense counsel brings into play another conversation  not recited in the Information  as to what was in the pending motion and the discussions outside of court. What was her understanding of who owned the funds, what they could be used for, and whether they were her funds (are you of any financial means). If the funds belonged to George or to his defense fund, they were not Shellies financial means.

Q: I understand that you do have other family members present with you, and Ill ask some more questions of them, but have you had discussions with them of at least trying to pull together some funds to accomplish a bond? A: We have discussed that Q: Okay A: -trying to pull together the members of the family to scrape up anything that we possibly can.

Its not clear at all what could be false about this, unless Shellie did not actually have discussions with family members. Again, possible deception, but not a false statement.

Here is the entire segment quoted in the Affidavit of Probable Cause from the prosecutions examination of Shellie (emphasis mine):

Q. And you mentioned also, in terms of the ability of your husband to make a bond amount, that you all had no money, is that correct? A. To my knowledge, that is correct. Q: Were you aware of the website that Mr. Zimmerman or somebody on his behalf created? A: Im aware of that website. Q: How much money is in that website right now? How much money as a result of that website was  A: Currently, I do not know. Q: Do you have any estimate as to how much money has already been obtained or collected? A: I do not.

Notice the specific wording of the questions and answers. I think the best case for perjury was the response to the question whether you all had no money. (added) The way the question was structured, however, the question was whether Shellie previously said that there was no money, not that at the time of the question there was no money.

But in the very next question the issue of the website fundraising was raised, and she said she doesnt currently know how much is in that website right now or how much was raised as a result. The word currently suggest that at the moment she was testifying she didnt know, which may have been correct. Similarly the denial that she had an estimate would only be false if at the time of testifying Shellie had an estimate. [see Update below]

It may sound like Im nitpicking the questions and answers, but thats whats at issue in a perjury prosecution.

This Court has held that statements alleged to be perjurious must be of empirical fact and not of opinion, belief or perception . One of the essential elements of perjury in official proceedings is that the person making the statement does not believe it to be true The questions posed to elicit perjured testimony must be asked with the appropriate specificity necessary to result in an equally specific statement of fact.

Instead of specifying the words which constituted empirical statements of fact that knowingly were false and why, the prosecution presents testimony and then evidence, and only generally and vaguely states that a false statement was made.

I am not excusing the conduct of the Zimmermans as to the bond hearing. I understand why the Judge feels he was deceived.

I am questioning the bringing of a felony perjury charge without greater specificity of the false statements, particularly while the alleged perjurers husband is awaiting trial in a highly publicized case.

Just more questions as to how this prosecution is being handled.

Update: Per a commenter, it appears that the above testimony was selectively edited by the prosecution to leave out the following exchange (deleted testimony in bold):

Q: How much money is in that website right now? How much money as a result of that website was 

A: Currently, I do not know.

Q: Who would know that?

A: That would be my brother-in-law.

Q: And is he  I know hes not in the same room as you, but is he available so we can speak to him, too, or the Court can inquire through the State or the Defense?

A: Im sure that we could probably get him on the phone.

Q: Okay. So hes not there now.

A: No, he is not, sir.

Q: Do you have any estimate as to how much money has already been obtained or collected?

A: I do not.

The deleted transcript language certainly gives a very different context to the issue of whether Shellie knew how much was available or had an estimate. She offered to get the person who knew on the phone, but the prosecution didnt take her up on that.

Note that in the Affidavit of Probable Cause the prosecution did not use an ellipsis or any other indication to show that words were omitted.

I think that the Zimmermans are rapidly becoming political prisoners, because the More Equal Pigs (reference George Orwell-"Animal Farm") like the faux DA, have determined that it is useful for the state for them to be so... They also fear riots by the segment of the community that voted 95% for Obuma in 2008, and would be afraid to call out the National Guard to stop the riots because they would be called racist, and have to endure the drone of , "No Justice, No Peace"...

If there is exculpatory evidence relating to Mrs Zimmerman which was suppressed by the prosecution, then it is a major malfeasance, and the Fed Courts could get involved under several Amendments including 4,5. I hope Gov Scott has the National Guard at the ready...

6
posted on 06/13/2012 7:38:11 PM PDT
by BigEdLB
(Now there ARE 1,000,000 regrets - but it may be too late.)

The Nazi stuck on stupid obsession on destroying the Jews of Warsaw is a similar case study. It’s like a rapist fearing retaliation or something, intent on murdering all witnesses and perceptions to the actions taken.

This prosecutor is obviously out of control and making more a case of herself.

7
posted on 06/13/2012 7:39:12 PM PDT
by JudgemAll
(Democrats Fed. job-security Whorocracy & hate:hypocrites must be gay like us or be tested/crucified)

I feel that they are going to lose the case and trying everything possible to punish them using the bureaucracy. They should have held the probable cause hearing before the judge and ended this months ago.

9
posted on 06/13/2012 7:40:57 PM PDT
by RetiredTexasVet
(There's a pill for just about everything ... except stupid!)

Florida prosecutor Angela Corey has come under withering criticism from Alan Dershowitz for overcharging and leaving out important details in the Affidavit of Probable Cause filed in connection with the charge of Second Degree Murder lodged against George Zimmerman. Corey allegedly responded by threatening to sue Dershowitz and Harvard.

Unfortuntely, Gov Rick Scott is part of the problem, as he was the one who selected Corey as the Special Prosecutor after the State Attorney for Seminole-Brevard County (Norm Wolfinger) wanted to let a Grand jury hear about it

Rick Scott needs to shut this case down immediately. If not, I can guarantee you he will be primaried out in 2014...if not recalled before them. So too will be State AG Pam Bondi. Real conservatives do not commit liberal atrocities like pleasing Al Sharpton and the New Black Panthers

21
posted on 06/13/2012 8:15:20 PM PDT
by SeminoleCounty
(Obama really was not born in Kenya...he was born in Greece. Look at the economy)

Tried to explaiher testimony could ha e an explanation and here it is.

Of course it ended wig George and myself being racists and this king it was okay to shoot an unarmed man
of course I think if the other guy instigated it by first action then that fight will end by my stopping g his action and if I feel my life is in danger then it’s going end permanently for the other guy.

Don’t start none, won’t be none.

22
posted on 06/13/2012 8:18:22 PM PDT
by Vendome
(Don't take life so seriously, you won't live thnrough it anyway)

So it was Corey who decided to charge Zimmerman's wife with perjury? Last night it sounded like it was the judge's decision.

There have been a number of cases in recent years where politics has been more important than justice. It may serve the interests of certain individuals like Nifong or Corey, or interest groups like the racial grievance industry, the anti-gun groups, feminists, etc., at the expense of individuals who don't get fair trials--and at the cost of the public's belief in our system of justice. Plenty of room for cynicism.

Maybe they genuinely think they have to sacrifice Zimmerman to avoid riots--sort of like the logic attributed to the high priest in John 11.50 (better than one man die than the whole nation perish).

I think it was Nixon, in the Watergate tapes, who said that perjury is a hard rap to prove. Maybe Mrs. Zimmerman needs to consult with Bill or Hillary.

Would be nice if some big name killer attorney helped out the Zimmermans. If I had the means, I’d pay for it myself as I believe he did nothing wrong. At all. If I was in the same circumstance, I would have done what he did...taking a life cannot be an easy thing-I’ve never had to do it-but just trying to even imagine as best I can what he was and is going thru, makes my heart break.

I feel sorry for the kid’s parents too; I don’t have children, so I don’t know what it’s like to lose one. I can only imagine losing my nephew this way. But as upset as I would be, I would be aching inside wishing that my nephew had not done what he did and crossed that line. If you act like a thug, you will be treated like a thug.

This prosecutor is so overzealous and if Tray had whacked George’s head on the ground a few more times, she’d be prosecuting HIM instead. That should give her pause, but she is going after this guy like he’s the next Charles Manson.
The man is not a criminal; he was just defending himself from a real criminal-thug. Was he supposed to let himself be beaten to death?

Sorry for the rant-I just feel they are after the Zimmerman’s for ANYTHING they can get so he is seems like more of a criminal-kinding of like they want to add to his resume with any additional charges they can come up with.

Would be nice if some big name killer attorney helped out the Zimmermans. If I had the means, I’d pay for it myself as I believe he did nothing wrong. At all. If I was in the same circumstance, I would have done what he did...taking a life cannot be an easy thing-I’ve never had to do it-but just trying to even imagine as best I can what he was and is going thru, makes my heart break.

I feel sorry for the kid’s parents too; I don’t have children, so I don’t know what it’s like to lose one. I can only imagine losing my nephew this way. But as upset as I would be, I would be aching inside wishing that my nephew had not done what he did and crossed that line. If you act like a thug, you will be treated like a thug.

This prosecutor is so overzealous and if Tray had whacked George’s head on the ground a few more times, she’d be prosecuting HIM instead. That should give her pause, but she is going after this guy like he’s the next Charles Manson.
The man is not a criminal; he was just defending himself from a real criminal-thug. Was he supposed to let himself be beaten to death?

Sorry for the rant-I just feel they are after the Zimmerman’s for ANYTHING they can get so he is seems like more of a criminal-kinding of like they want to add to his resume with any additional charges they can come up with.

Would be nice if some big name killer attorney helped out the Zimmermans. If I had the means, I’d pay for it myself as I believe he did nothing wrong. At all. If I was in the same circumstance, I would have done what he did...taking a life cannot be an easy thing-I’ve never had to do it-but just trying to even imagine as best I can what he was and is going thru, makes my heart break.

I feel sorry for the kid’s parents too; I don’t have children, so I don’t know what it’s like to lose one. I can only imagine losing my nephew this way. But as upset as I would be, I would be aching inside wishing that my nephew had not done what he did and crossed that line. If you act like a thug, you will be treated like a thug.

This prosecutor is so overzealous and if Tray had whacked George’s head on the ground a few more times, she’d be prosecuting HIM instead. That should give her pause, but she is going after this guy like he’s the next Charles Manson.
The man is not a criminal; he was just defending himself from a real criminal-thug. Was he supposed to let himself be beaten to death?

Sorry for the rant-I just feel they are after the Zimmerman’s for ANYTHING they can get so he is seems like more of a criminal-kinding of like they want to add to his resume with any additional charges they can come up with.

“I feel sorry for the kids parents too; I dont have children, so I dont know what its like to lose one. I can only imagine losing my nephew this way. But as upset as I would be, I would be aching inside wishing that my nephew had not done what he did and crossed that line. If you act like a thug, you will be treated like a thug.”

I’ll see your rant and raise you another ;)

I’m a single parent, having lost my wife to cancer. I raised our daughter in a way most here would consider far too ‘liberally’. But the one thing I instilled in her from day 1 was ‘actions have consequences”. If you screw up you are going to pay for it and Dad ain’t gonna bail you out.

A large number of her friends screwed up and their parents bailed them out. Or someone else did. Most of them have done jail time. A couple are dead. The parents have no idea why. They blame everyone but themselves.

My daughter avoided all that. She’s now got a great career i the Air Force. She credits her success to knowing there would be no bailouts and ‘excuses’ made for her. That she was responsible for her own actions.

IMO, lots of parents, even conservative ones, think sheltering their kids from the evils of the world will keep them safe. It’s my belief that most of the world’s Trayvons are created because they were never given/taught responsibility by their parents. And so they do any damn thing they want and expect that someone somewhere will bail them out.

That said, The prosecutor follows the same exact pattern. She feels no responsibility for her actions ‘knowing’ that the state/law will bail her out no matter what she does. There is no action/reaction for her. and like martin and a million other kids, she’s running wild because no one ever held her responsible for her own actions.

This entire system is not fixable. It has to eat itself and collapse before we can start over and do it right. Perhaps then responsibility for ones actions will rule the day rather than an entire cluster of law for personal benefit and existance for personal gratification.

“Corey allegedly responded by threatening to sue Dershowitz and Harvard.”

Oh, boy this ought to be a beaut!! On what grounds would she sue them, or has she said? I think that here is just another out of control prosecutor who needs to be legally put down and severely embarrassed.

Since Zimmerman is the only survivor of the two parties to the "confrontation," and the other witnesses apparently did not see the beginning of the encounter, a lot will depend on whether the jurors believe Zimmerman. The judge and the prosecutor are doing everything they can to ensure that no juror will believe Zimmerman.

Zimmerman's only hope is convincing the jury that he is black. Otherwise he is found guilty of being a racist bigot who murdered an innocent black child.

The deleted transcript language certainly gives a very different context to the issue of whether Shellie knew how much was available or had an estimate. She offered to get the person who knew on the phone, but the prosecution didnt take her up on that.

Note that in the Affidavit of Probable Cause the prosecution did not use an ellipsis or any other indication to show that words were omitted.

If Florida Law permits prosecutors to do this, then the Law needs to be changed. Either way, this witch needs to be hounded out of office.

But that bond standard is very different from a criminal charge of perjury, which requires proof of a specific material false statement which the person believes not to be true at the time of testimony.

Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.